T

he Jakarta branch of the Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights Association (PBHI) has filed a report with the National Police on the alleged misrepresentation of facts by four survey institutions in connection to the 2014 presidential election quick-count results.

The watchdog accused the Strategic Development and Policy Research Center (Puskaptis), the National Survey Institute (LSN), the Indonesian Research Center (IRC) and the Indonesian Votes Network (JSI) '€” which announced the victory of the Prabowo Subianto-Hatta Rajasa ticket '€” of public deception.

PBHI chairman Poltak Sinaga urged the pollsters to come clean about their methods.

'€œThese pollsters do not have good intentions ['€¦] There have been no apologies on their behalf, they have not admitted their mistakes might endanger the country,'€ Poltak said at National Police headquarters in South Jakarta, on Saturday.

Poltak submitted recordings from several television stations showing that LSN'€™s quick counts amounted to more than 100 percent of the vote.

'€œYou cannot produce such numbers out of thin air. They [the pollsters] must immediately clarify to the public the methodology used in their surveys to restore public calm,'€ he said, declining to disclose evidence on the other pollsters.

Seven pollsters such as Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC), the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI), Indikator Politik, CSIS-Cyrus, Kompas and the Radio Republic of Indonesia (RRI), placed candidates Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo-Jusuf Kalla in the lead with an average of 52 percent of the vote, whereas rivals Prabowo-Hatta garnered an average of 47 percent.

However, Puskaptis, JSI, IRC and the LSN declared that Prabowo-Hatta won by less than 1 to 4 percent. Their results have led to public confusion as their track records have shown they are less credible than those that announced Jokowi'€™s lead.

The Indonesian Association for Public Opinion Surveys (Persepi) previously declared that it would audit the methodology used by seven of the 11 pollsters in light of the irregularities. The seven agencies '€” five favoring Jokowi and two favoring Prabowo '€” are registered with the association.

Simon Tambunan, PBHI'€™s advocacy division head, said the police report had nothing to do with perceived biases.

'€œIf the differences are accountable, we'€™ll accept them. Our concern is that their results are being used to manipulate public perception,'€ Simon said. '€œIf there is intention to deceive the public, then criminal charges can be raised and tested by the police.'€

Puskaptis and IRC said they were ready to face an audit. '€œWe must be accountable to the public,'€ Puskaptis executive director Husin Yazid told a discussion on Saturday.

Dirga Ardiansa, a researcher at the University of Indonesia, said survey agencies should be transparent about their methods.

'€œWe should be careful with groups providing surveys with a margin of error above 2 percent. This means that each survey group takes samples from between 2,400 to 5,000 polling stations. If they would like to be precise, they need to take samples from 9,400 polling stations to achieve a margin of error below 1 percent,'€ he said.

LSI revealed it had gathered data from 2,000 polling stations while IRC and Puskaptis collected results from 1,800 and 1,250 polling stations, respectively.

Former Supreme Court justice Asep Iwan Iriawan said broadcasting false information to the public was criminal.

'€œThere is no room for error, especially with pollsters. Their professionalism is tied to their ability to provide accurate numbers and figures,'€ he said.

Asep said it did not matter whether the survey institutions recognized and corrected their errors.

'€œThey are bound by the principles of prudence,'€ he said. (tjs/put)